WORK AND PENSIONS

Benefit Fraud Inspectorate Report (Dundee City Council)

Chris Pond: On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) follow-up inspection report on Dundee City Council was published today and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.
	Following the housing Green Paper "Quality and Choice: A Decent Home for All", published in April 2000, the Department for Work and Pensions developed a performance framework for housing benefits. The "Performance Standards for housing benefits" allow local authorities to make a comprehensive self-assessment of whether they deliver benefit effectively and securely. They are the Standards that the Department for Work and Pensions expects local authorities to aspire to and achieve in time.
	The BFI inspected Dundee City Council against the Performance Standards for housing benefits. The report finds that the council is not at Standard for any of the seven functional areas of the Performance Standards—strategic management, customer services, processing of claims, working with landlords, internal security, counter-fraud, and overpayments.
	However, there had been some improvement since the first inspection report, published in June 1999, and the council's overall level of performance for administering benefits and counter-fraud activities was fair.
	At the first inspection, BFI reported that Dundee City Council needed to develop a more effective and secure benefits administration system. The council lacked key safeguarding policies and procedures, and there were significant delays in processing benefit claims.
	The follow-up report finds that the council had responded positively to the first inspection introducing 39 (71 per cent.) of 55 major recommendations. However, arrears of work and insufficient staff resources had prevented sustained improvement. Evidence gathering to support benefit claims was generally thorough but the council was failing to adequately protect the gateway to benefits due to processing delays. Performance was significantly below the clearance times required by the Standards. Overpayments were occurring because notified changes of circumstances were not being dealt with promptly.
	The report finds that policies for safeguarding benefits had been introduced and sanctions were used to punish and deter benefits fraudsters. Recovery of housing benefits overpayments had improved markedly since the first inspection.
	In 2002–03, Dundee City Council administered some £70 million in housing benefits, about 14 per cent. of its total gross revenue expenditure.
	The report makes recommendations to help the council address weaknesses and to further improve the administration of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit, as well as counter-fraud activities.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is now considering the report and will be asking the council for its proposals in response to the BFI's findings and recommendations.

Community Sentences and Benefits Pilots

Chris Pond: The Department is today publishing a research report by the National Centre for Social Research that presents the findings of the evaluation of the policy to apply benefit sanctions to offenders found by the courts to have breached their community sentences. Copies have been placed in the Library.
	The scheme has been piloted by Jobcentre Plus and the Probation Service in Derbyshire, Hertfordshire, Teesside and the West Midlands since October 2001. The evaluation looked at the effects of the policy between 15 October 2001 and 14 October 2002. Overall it found a small, positive impact on compliance with community sentences, with an estimated 1.8 per cent. increase in compliance among those on relevant benefits.
	The Government gave a commitment not to extend the scheme nationally without considering carefully the findings of the evaluation. Although there has been a positive impact on compliance and over 1,490 offenders have been sanctioned since the pilots commenced, the report also identifies some problems in the administration of the scheme and the way it is explained to offenders.
	On this basis we have decided to continue the pilots for a further year along with improvements to the monitoring and management of the probation processes together with better and more frequent explanations of the scheme to offenders themselves. These two changes, identified in the report as shortcomings during the first phase of the pilots, will ensure that the Department is informed of breaches, and a sanction imposed on the offender in all relevant cases. This in turn will help offenders to relate the sanction more clearly to the behaviour which gave rise to their breach.
	The results of these operational improvements on the effectiveness of the scheme will be assessed before a decision is made on the long term future of the scheme.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

European Union Council

Denis MacShane: The forthcoming business in the Council of the European Union is as follows:
	
		
			 Date Location Event 
		
		
			 February   
			 4 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 4 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 6 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 9 Brussels Meeting of Eurogroup 
			 10 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 11 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 11 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 13 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 18 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 18 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 19 Brussels Justice & Home Affairs 
			 20 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 23–24 Brussels General Affairs & External Relations (GAERC) 
			 24 Brussels EU Moldova Cooperation Council (Troika) 
			 24 Brussels Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 25–26 Porlaoise Meeting of Regional Policy Ministers 
			 25 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 26 Brussels Education, Youth & Culture Council 
			 26–27 Brussels Meeting of the Economic and Financial Committee 
			 26–27 Brussels Meeting of Regional Policy Ministers 
			 26 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 27 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 March   
			 1–2 Cork ASEM Finance Deputies' Meeting 
			 2 Brussels Environment Council 
			 3 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 3 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 4–6 Co. Clare Youth Ministerial Conference 
			 4–5 Brussels Employment, Social Policy, Health & Consumer Affairs (Ministerial Informal) 
			 8 Brussels Meeting of Eurogroup 
			 8–9 Ankara EU Ministerial Troika with Turkey 
			 8–9 Brusssels Transport, Telecom & Energy Council 
			 9 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 10 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 10 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 11 Dublin EU/Russia Ministerial Meeting (Troika) 
			 12 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 17 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 18 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 18–19 Dublin OECD Ministers Conference 
			 19 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 22 Brussels Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 22–23 Brussels General Affairs & External Relations (GAERC) 
			 24 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 24 Brussels COREPER 2 
			 24–25 Brussels Meeting of the Economic and Financial Committee 
			 25–26 Brussels EUROPEAN COUNCIL 
			 30 Dublin EU/Ukraine Ministerial Meeting (Troika) 
			 30 Brussels Justice & Home Affairs (Ministerial Informal) 
			 31 Brussels COREPER 1 
			 April   
			 2 Punchestown Meeting of Eurogroup 
			 2–3 Punchestown ECOFIN 
			 7–8 Co. Wicklow Ministerial Conference on Communicating Europe 
			 16–17 Tullamore GYMNICH 
			 26–27 Brussels General Affairs & External Relations (GAERC) 
			 26–27 Brussels Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 27 Luxembourg EU/Russia Permanent Partnership Council (Troika?) 
			 29–30 Brussels Meeting of the Economic and Financial Committee 
			 29–30 Brussels Justice & Home Affairs (Ministerial Informal) 
			 May   
			 6–7 Dublin EuroMed Foreign Ministers 
			 7 Limerick Meeting of Ministers with responsibility for Equality 
			 9–11 Killarney Agriculture Informal Ministerial Meeting 
			 10 Brussels Meeting of Eurogroup 
			 11 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 11–12 Cork Health Ministers Consultative Meeting 
			 14–16 Waterford Informal Meeting of EU Environment Ministers 
			 17–18 Brussels General Affairs & External Relations (GAERC) 
			 19–20 Offaly Informal Budget Committee 
			 21 Moscow EU/Russia Summit (Troika) 
			 23–25 Brussels Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 24–25 Brussels Meeting of the Economic and Financial Committee 
			 24–25 Brussels Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 25–27 Co. Galway Conference on Islands and Territorial cohesion—Meeting New Challenges 
			 27–28 Brussels Education, Youth & Culture Council 
			 27–31 Dublin Ministers and Directors General of Public Administration 
			 June   
			 1–2 Luxembourg Health Council 
			 1 Dublin Development Ministers' Meeting 
			 1 Luxembourg Meeting of Eurogroup 
			 2 Luxembourg ECOFIN 
			 8 Luxembourg Justice & Home Affairs Council Meeting 
			 10–11 Luxembourg Transport, Telecom & Energy Council 
			 14–15 Luxembourg General Affairs & External Relations (GAERC) 
			 17–18 Brussels EUROPEAN COUNCIL 
			 21–22 Luxembourg Agriculture & Fisheries Council 
			 21–22 Brussels Meeting of the Economic and Financial Committee 
			 28–29 Luxembourg Council Meeting of EU Environment Ministers 
			 July   
			 8 tbc EU-Ukraine Summit 
			 12–14 tbc Informal Ministerial Education Youth and Culture 
			 19 tbc JHA Council

FAC Response to 2003 FCO Annual Report

Jack Straw: This week, I laid before Parliament Government White Paper Command 6107, "Twelfth Report of the Foreign Affairs Committee Session 2002–03 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2003 Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs".
	The Committee draws a number of conclusions and makes various recommendations in its Report on a variety of issues including staff management, resources and the FCO's overseas estate. My response covers all these points.
	The FCO welcomes the Committee's recognition among other things of its staffs commitment, often in difficult circumstances; its Public Diplomacy efforts with the BBC World Service and British Council to improve perceptions of the UK in the Arab and Muslim worlds; the improved management of its locally-engaged staff overseas and its innovative and effective handling of rapidly increasing visa applications. The FCO will build on good practice in these areas and report on progress in future annual reports.
	The Command Paper addresses the Foreign Affairs Committee's concerns about the FCO's asset recycling programme. The programme permits the FCO to invest part of the funds gained from the sale of under-performing or unsuitable property in other projects such as ICT development. The Response provides details of how we identify potential property for sale, in line with the FCO's strategic priorities. It also explains that half such capital is reinvested into the FCO's estate and that this figure will rise to 80 per cent from 1 April this year. The Paper admits the difficulties involved in sustaining the programme over the long term, but also describes how it has allowed the FCO to develop important capital estate projects such as the UK's new Embassies in Berlin and Moscow.
	The paper takes issue with the Committee's observation that the FCO attempted to conceal losses associated with a cancelled ICT programme in its 2003 Annual Report and emphasises its commitment to reporting FCO activity, including costs incurred, as clearly as possible.
	In its report the Committee highlighted the increasing demands being placed on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office from new challenges such as Iraq while operating within a finite resource climate. Its report recommended that the Government increase the resources allocated to the FCO to prevent erosion of its core activity. The FCO's response welcomes the Committee's recognition of the difficult resource climate in which the FCO currently has to operate. It describes how the new FCO Strategy (Government White Paper Command 6052, "UK International Priorities: A Strategy for the FCO") which I laid before Parliament on 2 December 2003 will be a major tool in prioritising our work in future and ensuring that resources are targeted to achieve the most important goals of the Government's international policies.
	We are now in the process of putting the FCO Strategy into practice. We have established a departmental change programme, derived from the Strategy, which sets out what we intend to do to focus our resources on priorities, become more flexible and responsive, improve the diversity of our people, skills and experience, and target our activity to meet the needs of our customers across Government and the UK public. As part of the Change Programme we are reviewing our organisation in London and abroad to ensure that it is aligned with our priorities and able to deliver the outcomes we seek.
	The Foreign Affairs Committee outlines some concerns it has about the FCO's posts overseas. It recommends that the FCO open a new post in Kyrgyzstan, and suggests that where post closures are being considered, the Department should seek creative alternatives. The Response explains that, to meet its strategic priorities and ensure safe and secure working environments for its staff while working within resource limitations, the FCO is obliged to adapt and amend its pattern of overseas representation. The FCO has already introduced alternative methods of representation in some parts of West Africa and agrees with the Committee that such options are preferable to Post closure. The FCO's network of diplomatic posts will remain a vital means of delivering the Government's priorities and building UK influence abroad. We need to ensure that it is adequately resourced, secure and tasked to address our most important priorities.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Inland Fisheries Annual Reports

Angela Smith: Copies of the Inland Fisheries Annual Reports of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for 2000, 2001 and 2002 have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	These documents provide details of the Department's activities to conserve, protect and develop salmon and inland fisheries under the provisions of the Fisheries Act (Northern Ireland) 1966, as amended and include statistical information and income and expenditure details for those years.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Post Office Urban Reinvention Network

Stephen Timms: The urban re-invention programme aims to create a smaller, more viable network of post office branches adequate in number and suitably located to ensure accessible delivery of service to customers. At the end of the programme, within the UK as a whole, 95 per cent. of the urban population will still live within a mile of the nearest Post Office branch. It is supported directly by Government funding. This programme is absolutely necessary. If the Post office does not adapt to changing customer demands it will spiral into terminal decline.
	During recent weeks Members of Parliament and Postwatch have become increasingly concerned about some aspects of the urban re-invention programme. In particular, the consultation arrangements have been criticised. There has been mounting evidence that in too many cases Post Office Limited has not handled them appropriately, or with sufficient sensitivity. Accordingly I asked Post Office Limited and Postwatch to review urgently the arrangements for the consultation currently employed and to propose changes to make them more inclusive and appropriate to achieve a viable network to serve the public after the programme is concluded.
	They have responded to this challenge and I am pleased to announce the following changes applicable to the remainder of the programme which will take immediate effect.
	Post Office Limited will advise MPs and local authorities as soon as possible of the remaining timetable for commencing consultations on plans for their area.
	Local authorities will be invited to provide relevant information, in advance, on infrastructure and regeneration projects to assist Post Office Limited in the preparation of area plans.
	When preparing an area plan, Post Office Limited will achieve a balance between sub-postmasters volunteering to leave the network, those offices which are not viable and the need for relocations and new openings.
	Post Office Limited will advise MPs and members of the devolved administrations on a strictly confidential basis of proposals, including the overall rationale for the proposed area plan, one week before they are put out to public consultation.
	Public consultation will be on the proposal to close an individual office but Post Office Limited will also take account of, and respond to, views expressed about the proposed service provision in the area in reaching decisions on individual closures.
	Once final decisions have been made and announced, Post Office Limited will write to Postwatch, Members of Parliament and local authorities referring to the main points raised during the consultation and giving the reasons for its decision.
	Public consultation will normally last for six weeks but will in future be extended to take account of public holidays that occur during that period.
	In view of Post Office Limited's responsibility to notify its staff at directly-managed offices of any proposal to close the office before the proposal is put to public consultation, the advance notification of Postwatch, MPs and of the devolved administrations will be replaced by notification of the proposal the day before the proposal is made public and the public consultation period will be extended to eight weeks.
	If branches previously identified as expecting to receive additional custom following closure of nearby offices, are themselves subsequently proposed for closure, Post Office Limited will provide a detailed explanation of its reasoning in putting forward the proposal for consultation.
	Post Office Limited will establish a separate team dedicated to promoting and supervising the implementation of investment required to upgrade remaining offices to ensure the provision of adequate facilities for the additional custom provoked by the closure of nearby offices.
	Criteria have been agreed to define the "exceptional circumstances" which may justify putting into public consultation a closure proposal for an office located within the 10 per cent. most deprived urban wards and with no other office within half a mile. The core criteria are: the branch proposed for closure being relatively small; having experienced a significant decline in business between March 2000 and March 2003 with a continuing trend which, if it has not already done so, will render the business non-viable; and having a dense network of surrounding offices with several accessible by reasonable transport links within half a mile to a mile. Other criteria which might also apply include: significant depopulation of the surrounding area or the geography of public service and retail provision has shifted; a clear majority of customers of the branch proposed for closure live within half a mile of alternative branches; and security issues which make it unlikely to be feasible to continue service.
	Finally Post Office Limited has confirmed that the documentation between itself and a sub-postmaster does not create any binding arrangement for closure until the public consultation has been completed. No contract binding on Post Office Limited is signed before the public consultation process has ended.
	The above new arrangements will be reviewed by Post Office Limited and Postwatch one month after commencement to ensure that the implementation is satisfactory.
	Post Office closures will inevitably continue to be contentious. However, these changes to procedure should ensure that there is confidence in the consultation process.
	Post Office Limited is committed to the successful implementation of the new arrangements and to working with Postwatch to ensure an effective consultation process designed to maximise the quality of judgment and transparency, and to produce a fair result for customers and the Company.

EDUCATION

Youth Council for Northern Ireland

Jane Kennedy: I have published today the Accounts of the Youth Council for Northern Ireland for the period 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001. Copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.